Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Fujifilm

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 4, 2010, 8:47 PM   #41
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

it sure does look like an attractive digicam as far as versatility goes. the good thing about the small sensors is its much easier to make a 30x zoom lens for a small sensor than any kind of superzoom for a dslr. the lens looks quite large for a digicam, so it could probably manage the 30x pretty easily for such a small image circle. time will tell, but even if the optics aren't perfect at 720mm, it is still there for when you absolutely need it.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2010, 9:30 PM   #42
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 34
Default

@ mrmacmusic

A 24 to 720mm lens is not likely to be of good quality. Lens makers struggle to achieve good optical quality even with short range lenses, and even then after constant mechanical polishing which ups the cost of the lens. But this camera is only $400. Surely that's a little fishy.

720mm is not versatility. It's more likely stupidity. It's obviously something that the marketing department has forced the engineers to squeeze out. The megapixel race is slowing down so they've decided to try to gain an edge in the zoom race.

I like AA's. But I don't like that 4 AA's squeeze out only 300 shots. My S6500FD can do more. I say increase yield, reduce batteries. AA batts are heavy.

I would say the advantage of a compact is that its small and light. If your going to carry around something big and heavy it might as well be a DSLR. Make no mistake, I like my S6500FD. IMO It was the best value buy for its time: IQ as good as an entry level DSLR at half the cost. But now the playing field is different. The new entry level DSLR models are truly in a different league in terms of IQ. This Fuji will not be able to match them.

Last edited by Shahmatt; Feb 4, 2010 at 9:33 PM.
Shahmatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2010, 10:14 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

shamatt,

Where do you get your information?

"But this camera is only $400."

I've only seen it advertised in two places (pre-release) - amazon and BH, and both listed the price as $499.99. Where can you buy it for $400?

"But I don't like that 4 AA's squeeze out only 300 shots. "

According to Fuji, this camera will take approximately 700 shots per charge. Where are you coming up with the 300?

Reducing the number of AA's from 4 to 3 will save you a whopping 1.1 oz...on a camera that weighs in at over 26 oz, I don't really consider that significant...do you?

the Hun
rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2010, 10:21 PM   #44
Member
 
Strobe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nawthen Hemisphere
Posts: 90
Default

Thanks Rinnie....

Hey GJ....... It's workin' !
Attached Images
 
Strobe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2010, 10:22 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Actually that is just ok if you can only get 700 between battery change. The pentax DSLR K-x gets 1200 shot with 4 AA rechargeable batteries and 1400 with lithium disposable one. I would expect more form a smaller camera a smaller sensor then 700.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2010, 10:31 PM   #46
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

shahmatt,

you lost all credibility when you said the s6500 had image quality comparable to any dslr. make no mistake, the image quality from any digicam, never touched any dslr of any time period or of any cost. end of story.

also you fail to realize just how small of sensor is in the hs10, it doesn't take all that much optics to make a 30x zoom for a small sensor.

sure its possible the iq of the lens will not be good. perhaps its overly ambitious, but its a fairly large chunk of glass in front of a small sensor. much cheaper and easier to make than even a 10x zoom on a dslr.

like anything, have to wait and see when we get some test shots.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2010, 10:43 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strobe View Post

Hey GJ....... It's workin' !
I have a feeling that if you get it, I won't be too far behind. I just want to FEEL it and check it out. "Once burnt, twice learnt"
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2010, 1:54 AM   #48
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rinniethehun View Post
shamatt,

Where do you get your information?

"But this camera is only $400."

I've only seen it advertised in two places (pre-release) - amazon and BH, and both listed the price as $499.99. Where can you buy it for $400?

"But I don't like that 4 AA's squeeze out only 300 shots. "

According to Fuji, this camera will take approximately 700 shots per charge. Where are you coming up with the 300?

Reducing the number of AA's from 4 to 3 will save you a whopping 1.1 oz...on a camera that weighs in at over 26 oz, I don't really consider that significant...do you?

the Hun
Apologies. It's $500 as you said. Somehow I misread that. But I still think that the cost of a good quality 24-720 will be way higher.

My source for battery life was here:
http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=4079

Reducing the weight by one or even two batteries is all to the good. I don't want whopping major changes. Small steps are what's necessary.

@ Hards80

I said the camera matched "entry-level" DSLRs not any DSLR. And it does if you look at these IS400 shots.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fu...ghtshot400.jpg
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...ghtshot400.jpg
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ol...hot400-std.jpg
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ghtshot400.jpg
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...ghtshot400.jpg

The Fuji gives reasonable results, beating out the A100, but only very marginally more noisy than the rest. The 400D (Rebel) was king at the time if I remember.

Last edited by Shahmatt; Feb 5, 2010 at 2:01 AM.
Shahmatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2010, 4:52 AM   #49
Senior Member
 
mrmacmusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shahmatt View Post
@ mrmacmusic

A 24 to 720mm lens is not likely to be of good quality. Lens makers struggle to achieve good optical quality even with short range lenses, and even then after constant mechanical polishing which ups the cost of the lens. But this camera is only $400. Surely that's a little fishy.

720mm is not versatility. It's more likely stupidity. It's obviously something that the marketing department has forced the engineers to squeeze out. The megapixel race is slowing down so they've decided to try to gain an edge in the zoom race.
Why is it not going to good quality? Define "good"? As hards80 points out, it's much easier to make an optic with this kind of range for a smaller sensor... Sure, this amount of range for a DSLR would cost a fortune, but that's an apples and oranges comparison.

OK, I may be wrong, but having 720mm does offer extra versatility. You won't use it every day, but it'll be there when you need it.... like when you're at the zoo, or the football field, or the airshow, or in the park....... The fact that Fuji have chosen to give you manual zoom and focus rings is a huge bonus, and makes that range all the more usable compared to a zoom lever.

Quote:
I like AA's. But I don't like that 4 AA's squeeze out only 300 shots. My S6500FD can do more. I say increase yield, reduce batteries. AA batts are heavy.
Again, I think it's been pointed out that 300 shots isn't entirely accurate, but even if it was, at less than 10 for a set of 4x 2700mAh rechargeables, I'll happily have a couple of spare sets charged and ready to go! Reducing the number of batteries may be no bad thing, but the weight of a couple of AA's... hardly worth it wouldn't you say?

Quote:
I would say the advantage of a compact is that its small and light. If your going to carry around something big and heavy it might as well be a DSLR. Make no mistake, I like my S6500FD. IMO It was the best value buy for its time: IQ as good as an entry level DSLR at half the cost. But now the playing field is different. The new entry level DSLR models are truly in a different league in terms of IQ. This Fuji will not be able to match them.
I think you've missed the point... the HS10 is not a compact camera! It's an all-singing, all-dancing advanced bridge camera - a step up from your average compact or point-and-shoot, and especially useful to those that don't want (or need/can afford) a DSLR outfit, and would prefer the manual control, ergonomics and feel of a larger camera.

On paper, the HS10 offers an awful lot of camera for the money, and without seeing samples or technical reviews we have absolutely no idea whether or not this will be every bit as good as the S6500 was in it's day.
mrmacmusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2010, 7:09 AM   #50
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
make no mistake, the image quality from any digicam, never touched any dslr of any time period or of any cost. end of story.
Wrong. Every heard of a camera called the Sony R1. what a camera it was. Too bad, sony left that road.
What a lens that cam had... I almost bought it
tsk1979 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:37 AM.